My series on Covid 19 started on March 20, 2020. It seems almost a lifetime ago when the US shut down “to slow the spread.” At the time, I looked at what was known and the data available and concluded a general lockdown was a terrible idea—a targeted approach protecting those at most risk and ending lockdowns before they did significant damage was the right way. Chapter and verse of my proposals to keep the nation, especially the schools, open while doing everything possible to limit the loss of the vulnerable are there for anyone to see.

The government bureaucratic establishment, relying on Neil Ferguson’s Imperial College model, came down solidly in favor of lockdowns and not for just a few weeks. They told us if we didn’t close down, millions more would be sure to die—anyone coming to a different conclusion labeled as favoring mass death. Even though many people quickly concluded the Imperial College model was defective, much of the world remained shut down.

This week a John’s Hopkins economic Metastudy concluded the lockdowns were a disaster. Researchers looked at 22 studies and found no gain while enumerating the massive costs. A .02% reduction in deaths didn’t come close to offsetting the enormous harm they caused. This study vindicates all those suffering establishment abuses for predicting this outcome and proposing a different path from the beginning.

Neil Ferguson of defective Imperial model fame and University of Oxford’s Seth Flaxman challenged the study. The latter is the lead author on a 2020 study that estimated that lockdowns had likely saved up to three million lives across Europe. So far, I haven’t found r any others.  Flaxman’s figures appear based on the Imperial Model.

So much is happening, my commentary will cover several widely different subjects. Hopefully, I can give a different slant from what you’re hearing.

 Ukraine is on the verge of being another disaster overseen by the Biden regime. The media is already setting out a covering narrative to protect the administration. Wednesday’s (1/26) New York times “The Morning” was mainly devoted to this theme. Other media followed. It’s Trump’s fault. Who would’ve guessed?

The case against Trump is straightforward. Everyone knows of his affection for Putin and Russia. He attacked our NATO allies. Chancellor Merkel of Germany was his particular target driving a wedge between our countries. No wonder the Germans are showing reluctance to help. This discord has prevented a united front. 

Even a cursory look at the facts reveals a narrative riddled with holes. You can’t revive the thoroughly debunked Russian collusion story. In any case, Trump’s actions hardly show warmth toward the Russians. Unlike President Obama, he sent Ukraine lethal weapons, resulting in dead Russians. The front stabilized. More Russians died when they got too aggressive in Syria. Contrasting Trump’s Russian actions against Obama leaves no illusions about who was more formidable.

When Trump took office, he found Chancellor Angela Merkel already allowed one million Muslim immigrants. Germany was closing its nuclear plants. It also signed on to the Nord Stream 2 pipeline to replace the lost energy, making Germany heavily dependent on Russia. Though Germany as a NATO member pledged to spend two percent of GDP on its military, it was closer to one percent. These are strange actions for ta NATO lynchpin. 

Looking at 35,000+ US military in Europe to protect against aggressors, mainly Russia, Trump rightly questioned Merkel about what Germany was doing. The result was friction between the two, but Germany’s actions or lack caused the strain. Rick Grennell Trumps, ambassador to Germany, continued to press that nation on where it stood. Merkel let her dislike of Grennell be well known. Not surprisingly, our media supported Merkel. 

One can’t realize how badly the administration had failed us in this pandemic until it hits you personally. According to Biden’s chief medical spokesman, Dr. Anthony Fauci, “just about everybody” will eventually be infected with the omicron variant of the coronavirus.” This fact is of little importance to some, but it can be a death sentence to others.

We have known almost from the beginning Covid hits age groups very differently. The New York Times shows us graphically the great danger to octogenarians versus the less than flu for children. Unless you have some co-morbidity, people under 50 have little likelihood of hospitalization, much less dying from covid. For a person in their 80s, the chance of dying from the disease multiplies. The daily covid death toll is dominated by those over 65. While vaccination cuts your risk from the disease, the elderly show evidence of waning protection. Common sense: those over 65 and at-risk need more help.

The solution to the problem exists. A person in a high-risk group evidencing covid symptoms takes a rapid home test. Upon confirmation by the second swab, a telemedicine call results in an antibody prescription. Whether pills or infusion, the person has reduced the risk of hospitalization and death by up to 90%. We don’t have to invent the tests or therapeutics; we’ve already done that. Combined with the fact we’re fully vaccinated, including a booster, happy days, we’ve minimalized the problem.

Unfortunately, I’ve found this program doesn’t exist under the Biden administration and won’t for quite a while. This week, our daughter woke up with some covid symptoms. She tried to find a place to buy a rapid home test, but none were available. She asked us if we had some. In a sane world, all the highly at risk would have them. We have hope Amazon will deliver our order before the end of the month.